From: Chris Ball <cjb@laptop.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@console-pimps.org>,
Albert Herranz <albert_herranz@yahoo.es>,
Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@mvista.com>,
linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>,
Pierre Ossman <pierre@ossman.eu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] sdhci: Move real work out of an atomic context
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 03:28:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100909022834.GA10542@void.printf.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100908213740.GA7550@void.printf.net>
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 10:37:41PM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 03:38:13PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > I noticed no throughput drop neither with PIO transfers nor
> > > with DMA (tested on MPC8569E CPU), while latencies should be
> > > greatly improved.
> >
> > This patchset isn't causing any problems yet, but may do so in the
> > future and will impact the validity of any testing. It seems to be
> > kind of stuck. Should I drop it all?
>
> I suggest keeping it -- I'll find time to test it out here soon, and
> will keep it in mind as a possible regression cause.
Am running this now. The first thing I'm noticing is a repeated BUG():
[ 7.288186] Write protecting the kernel read-only data: 1072k
[ 7.306446] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/mutex.c:94
[ 7.324375] in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, pid: 532, name: mmc2/0
[ 7.340989] Pid: 532, comm: mmc2/0 Not tainted 2.6.35.4_xo1.5-20100908.2141.olpc.44f3b38_DIRTY #1
[ 7.360129] Call Trace:
[ 7.372843] [<b04193ce>] __might_sleep+0xd9/0xe0
[ 7.387864] [<b07260cc>] mutex_lock+0x1c/0x2a
[ 7.402576] [<b06396e8>] sdhci_led_control+0x1a/0x41
[ 7.417727] [<b063bece>] led_trigger_event+0x42/0x5c
[ 7.432807] [<b06326f8>] mmc_request_done+0x56/0x6f
[ 7.447597] [<b063a2d1>] sdhci_finish_work+0xc8/0xcd
[ 7.462643] [<b063a209>] ? sdhci_finish_work+0x0/0xcd
[ 7.477941] [<b0432776>] worker_thread+0x165/0x1ed
[ 7.492856] [<b063a209>] ? sdhci_finish_work+0x0/0xcd
[ 7.508204] [<b0435591>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x34
[ 7.524178] [<b0432611>] ? worker_thread+0x0/0x1ed
[ 7.538953] [<b04352a0>] kthread+0x63/0x68
[ 7.552659] [<b043523d>] ? kthread+0x0/0x68
[ 7.566349] [<b0402cf6>] kernel_thread_helper+0x6/0x10
[ 7.709931] udev: starting version 141
[ 7.940374] mmc2: new high speed SDHC card at address e4da
[ 8.058165] mmcblk0: mmc2:e4da SU04G 3.69 GiB
[ 8.135730] mmcblk0: p1 p2
Full dmesg is at http://chris.printf.net/anton-mutex-dmesg.txt.
Anton, the kernel is 2.6.35.4-olpc plus your patchset from -mm.
I can think about how to test on an upstream kernel instead, but
perhaps your own tests simply didn't hit sdhci_led_control().
Andrew, if you want to drop this while the BUG() and potential
performance regressions are worked out, I'd be happy to keep
testing patches from Anton until it's without regressions here.
Thanks,
--
Chris Ball <cjb@laptop.org> <http://printf.net/>
One Laptop Per Child
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-09 2:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-14 13:07 [PATCH 0/8] sdhci: Move real work out of an atomic context Anton Vorontsov
2010-07-14 13:07 ` [PATCH 1/8] sdhci: Turn timeout timer into delayed work Anton Vorontsov
2010-07-14 13:07 ` [PATCH 2/8] sdhci: Use work structs instead of tasklets Anton Vorontsov
2010-07-14 13:08 ` [PATCH 3/8] sdhci: Clear interrupt status register just once Anton Vorontsov
2010-07-14 13:08 ` [PATCH 4/8] sdhci: Use threaded IRQ handler Anton Vorontsov
2010-07-14 13:08 ` [PATCH 5/8] sdhci: Turn host->lock into a mutex Anton Vorontsov
2010-07-14 13:08 ` [PATCH 6/8] sdhci: Get rid of card detect work Anton Vorontsov
2010-07-14 13:08 ` [PATCH 7/8] sdhci: Get rid of mdelay()s where it is safe and makes sense Anton Vorontsov
2010-07-14 13:08 ` [PATCH 8/8] sdhci: Use jiffies instead of a timeout counter Anton Vorontsov
2010-07-15 6:02 ` [PATCH 0/8] sdhci: Move real work out of an atomic context Matt Fleming
2010-07-21 21:13 ` Andrew Morton
2010-09-07 22:38 ` Andrew Morton
2010-09-08 21:37 ` Chris Ball
2010-09-08 21:57 ` Anton Vorontsov
2010-09-08 22:05 ` Chris Ball
2010-09-08 22:27 ` Anton Vorontsov
2010-09-09 2:28 ` Chris Ball [this message]
2010-09-09 7:15 ` Anton Vorontsov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100909022834.GA10542@void.printf.net \
--to=cjb@laptop.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=albert_herranz@yahoo.es \
--cc=avorontsov@mvista.com \
--cc=ben-linux@fluff.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=matt@console-pimps.org \
--cc=pierre@ossman.eu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).